Christian Posta

Recent Posts

Let’s dive right in! In the previous post (part I), we set up the context for this blog. Basically, as we introduce a strategy to bring microservices to our architecture, we cannot and should not disrupt the current request flows. Our “monolith” applications typically provide a lot of value for the business and we must drive down the risk of negatively affecting these systems as we iterate and expand. This leads us to an often-overlooked fact: when we start to explore a monolith to the microservice journey we’re going to quickly run into the undesirable, sometimes nasty parts that we cannot just wish away. I encourage you to go back and read the first part if you haven’t yet. Also, go read the part about when NOT do microservices.

As part of a two-day microservices workshop I’m putting together, I’ve been thinking a lot about how to explain monolith-application decomposition and what a transition to microservices might look like. This is a small subset of that material, but I want to share it with you to get feedback (in the workshop we go into more detail about whether you should even break up your monolith). I base this on my own tried and true real-life experience as well as my work with the many Red Hat customers I’ve met over North America for the last few years. Part I explores the architecture while the second part (to be released shortly) will cover some technology that can greatly help in this area. Follow along (@christianposta) on Twitter or http://developers.redhat.com for the latest updates and discussion.

This blog is part of a series looking deeper at Envoy Proxy and Istio.io and how it enables a more elegant way to connect and manage microservices. Follow me @christianposta to stay up with these blog post releases. I think the flow for what I cover over the next series will be something like: